Steve Jobs: "I want Apple's browser to be called Freedom." Engineering director: "I won't let you down. I will not give you up. Gotta have some faith in the sound. It's the one good thing that I've got"

Steve Jobs: "I want Apple's browser to be called Freedom." Engineering director: "I won't let you down. I will not give you up. Gotta have some faith in the sound. It's the one good thing that I've got"

Also, our company held a contest to rename a software that we paid a company to create for us. It had a project code name, but once it went live, they wanted a catchy name that they could call it for our customers. They took suggestions from the whole company, then narrowed the list down to 20. Then they took that list and found that every single name already had been slapped on a piece of software and registered. 3 years later, it is still referred to internally by the project name and described to clients as "our proprietary software that does X".

Also, our company held a contest to rename a software that we paid a company to create for us. It had a project code name, but once it went live, they wanted a catchy name that they could call it for our customers. They took suggestions from the whole company, then narrowed the list down to 20. Then they took that list and found that every single name already had been slapped on a piece of software and registered. 3 years later, it is still referred to internally by the project name and described to clients as "our proprietary software that does X".

MrEricSir:diaphoresis: dnrtfa: A browser called Freedom... from APPLE... whose OS and apps offer no Freedom of any kind...

Given that WebKit is free in both senses of the word (and has an FSF approved license) it's pretty clear you have no clue what you're babbling about.

Maybe you should go review how open source licensing works before you tell someone else they don't know what they're talking about, champ.

Safari is integrated with open source components like WebKit, yes. But that doesn't mean they don't have proprietary parts. In fact, depending on the license, it's permissible to take any open source project and sell it for your own profit. That includes adding on proprietary parts.

Having some open source parts around it just gives users the ability to do some of Apple's product development for them, and then Apple can try to talk out their ass pretending to have a "Freedom" browser. Why do you think Google is all about open source? It's not because they're open source fanboys.

torusXL:MrEricSir: diaphoresis: dnrtfa: A browser called Freedom... from APPLE... whose OS and apps offer no Freedom of any kind...

Given that WebKit is free in both senses of the word (and has an FSF approved license) it's pretty clear you have no clue what you're babbling about.

Maybe you should go review how open source licensing works before you tell someone else they don't know what they're talking about, champ.

Safari is integrated with open source components like WebKit, yes. But that doesn't mean they don't have proprietary parts. In fact, depending on the license, it's permissible to take any open source project and sell it for your own profit. That includes adding on proprietary parts.

Having some open source parts around it just gives users the ability to do some of Apple's product development for them, and then Apple can try to talk out their ass pretending to have a "Freedom" browser. Why do you think Google is all about open source? It's not because they're open source fanboys.

Funny how you're describing the benefits of FOSS as though they were negatives. Do you work for Microsoft by any chance?

MrEricSir:torusXL: MrEricSir: diaphoresis: dnrtfa: A browser called Freedom... from APPLE... whose OS and apps offer no Freedom of any kind...

Given that WebKit is free in both senses of the word (and has an FSF approved license) it's pretty clear you have no clue what you're babbling about.

Maybe you should go review how open source licensing works before you tell someone else they don't know what they're talking about, champ.

Safari is integrated with open source components like WebKit, yes. But that doesn't mean they don't have proprietary parts. In fact, depending on the license, it's permissible to take any open source project and sell it for your own profit. That includes adding on proprietary parts.

Having some open source parts around it just gives users the ability to do some of Apple's product development for them, and then Apple can try to talk out their ass pretending to have a "Freedom" browser. Why do you think Google is all about open source? It's not because they're open source fanboys.

Funny how you're describing the benefits of FOSS as though they were negatives. Do you work for Microsoft by any chance?

Funny how you're taking this way too personally. I wasn't bashing FOSS, I was just describing how it actually works and then describing how for-profit corporations might use it for what it is. Reality is a useful thing to look at, you might try it sometime.

To answer your silly question, no I don't, but I hear they pay well so I wouldn't mind if I ever had an offer ;) And if I did, I'd still be using Linux at home with my dual-boot setup.

torusXL:MrEricSir: torusXL: MrEricSir: diaphoresis: dnrtfa: A browser called Freedom... from APPLE... whose OS and apps offer no Freedom of any kind...

Given that WebKit is free in both senses of the word (and has an FSF approved license) it's pretty clear you have no clue what you're babbling about.

Maybe you should go review how open source licensing works before you tell someone else they don't know what they're talking about, champ.

Safari is integrated with open source components like WebKit, yes. But that doesn't mean they don't have proprietary parts. In fact, depending on the license, it's permissible to take any open source project and sell it for your own profit. That includes adding on proprietary parts.

Having some open source parts around it just gives users the ability to do some of Apple's product development for them, and then Apple can try to talk out their ass pretending to have a "Freedom" browser. Why do you think Google is all about open source? It's not because they're open source fanboys.

Funny how you're describing the benefits of FOSS as though they were negatives. Do you work for Microsoft by any chance?

Funny how you're taking this way too personally. I wasn't bashing FOSS, I was just describing how it actually works and then describing how for-profit corporations might use it for what it is. Reality is a useful thing to look at, you might try it sometime.

To answer your silly question, no I don't, but I hear they pay well so I wouldn't mind if I ever had an offer ;) And if I did, I'd still be using Linux at home with my dual-boot setup.

Given that I'm a professional FOSS developer, I don't need an explanation as to how it works.

And believe me, Apple's contributions to FOSS are nothing to scoff at!

MrEricSir:Given that I'm a professional FOSS developer, I don't need an explanation as to how it works.

And believe me, Apple's contributions to FOSS are nothing to scoff at!

For realz man, I was never scoffing at FOSS. I love FOSS - it's a good thing for the world, and honestly it's a shame that it's not more well known or respected outside tech circles. I was just illustrating from the point of view that corporations that have the goal of making profits.

I am though scoffing at Apple's contributions because the contributions they make is likely small compared to the contributions that they could be, and/or are not, making. Sure, they make some contributions, but my belief (which could be wrong, I'm just speculating) is that it probably stems from a business objective.

I mean, we should get real here and remember that Apple officially does not donate to charity, while simultaneously sitting on a wad of over $100 billion cash. CASH. Not bonds or stocks or any kinds of financial assets, but enough cash they could fill a vault and swim in it. For this, I will scoff at them until the day I die.